User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 17 to 24 of 73

Thread: Poachers

  1. #17
    N=R* fs fp ne fl fi fc L Pyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,844
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (Mike King @ Oct. 12 2004,3:42)] Plants need conserving in collections and also need to be distributed to ensure continued survival even though the original stands may have been destroyed years ago (exapmple, flava 'Burgundy' and flava 'Claret' were originally field collected before the sites were destroyed).
    Mike,

    I do not deny that but ABGs first and foremost action with the GA stand is to get it back up to healthy status. Once that has occured odds are they will probably release a few of the GA plants to growers. But right now their job is collection of seed, rearing the plants until they are large enough to fend for themselves and then replacing then in the wild. They do not pollinate any of their own plants so there is no "free" seed as of yet. I am sure the day will come but patience is in order.
    'My love was science- specifically biology and, more specifically, when placed in a common jar, which of two organisms would devour the other.'

    See You Space Cowboy

    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat
    Hagerstown, Maryland

    --
    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat

  2. #18
    Guest
    [quote=0zzy,Oct. 12 2004,10:28]Use your natural instincts of suspicion. Every time you by a plant try to investigate the seller a little. Notice things that may not be obvious. If you see somebody selling alot of full grown plants. If you see plants for sell on ebay by somebody that is not known in the cp community or if they are from a place that cp's grows naturally. If somebody has alot of bare root plants that they need to sell. All of these should raise warning signs.

    Essentially, you're saying, "guilty until proven innocent."

    I agree that poaching is not even a fraction of the threat of development but it still exists and it is still a problem. Check out Barry's website sarracenia.com.

    This quote sums my point. The health of a site is not irreversibly harmed by poaching. That is a thing of the past. The real threats today are reckless spraying and land development. Energy should really be focused in addressing this. Letters should be sent to power companies, suggesting alternatives to herbicide use in powercut sites. The Yellow River site is a perfect example; it was a fantastic site for Sarracenia for decades. There were thousands of plants that would take a poacher a month to completely remove. In one pass all the plants were wiped-out. If you've ever visited the site, you too will miss the leucos, psitts, gulfensis, purps and nearby flavas. Not to mention the spectrum of hybrids.

    When I said local it was meant to be a relative term. There are well documented locations near the NC/GA state line. Asheville is about 50 miles north east from the documented locations. I can't say that these location are the ones that the ranger was telling me about. I didn't ask. I don't know very much about oreo locations but I don't know any locations that are east of Asheville.

    I'm sorry, I meant west of Ashville. Fifty miles is probably conservative, unless you have a helicopter. Besides, the site we're both referring to is doing well. Perhaps the Ranger's poaching accounts are overstated.

    I think we should not turn a blind eye to any threats that face cp's. We should be putting most of our efforts towards saving locations and location material. But we should still fight the poaching problems.
    Until you see the damage that poaching does please don't say that it's so small that we need not worry about it. I know of poaching operations that are so big it not only makes a good living for the owner but it employs 4 or five other people. Thats alot of plants that have to be dug up and sold at $2.50 a plant.
    When you walk out into a field and see 200 holes where vft's use to be, then you can tell me how big a problem poaching is or isn't.

    You're right, I've never walked through a field to find 200 holes where vfts used to be. I've seen signs of poaching but, the number of holes has always been less than 10. Further, this has been a rare sight. I don't mean to sound condescending but, I admire your passion. My point is that if the goal is to save these remaining plant sites, your energy might be misdirected.

    My hopes are that my comments are taken to provoke thought and not to be taken personally. This is afterall a discussion and we don't have to agree completely.

    imduff

  3. #19

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Martinez, California
    Posts
    3,556
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well said, Imduff. Oz-man is indeed passionate, and I do not blame him. I remember the Green Swamp in 1973. I was out doing my observations, when a nurseryman's truck pulled up and 4 guys got out. After about 1/2 hour, they had about 300 plants, and away they went. I looked into the flava field, and couldn't even tell they were there. After all, then there were thousands of plants. That same area no longer exists today. Development took in 1 week, what a truckload of legal collectors could not. (Yes, they had permits). Come to think of it, the developer had legal permits too. So who was right???
    45 yrs. growin\'
    Founder NASC

  4. #20
    N=R* fs fp ne fl fi fc L Pyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,844
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (Bugweed @ Oct. 13 2004,9:47)]Florida is the only state that I am aware of that actually issues sarracenia collecting permits. Otherwise, a signed permission slip from the landowner is the only "certificate" you need in most states. Does anyone know of any other states that have sarracenia collecting permits?? I would think North Carolina would be in there, but have heard no word.
    I do not know if GA has state issue permits but I do know that to remove any plants on federal land (BLM, National Forest, etc.) you have to go through a ton of paperwork. A signed slip of paper does not cut it with the feds
    'My love was science- specifically biology and, more specifically, when placed in a common jar, which of two organisms would devour the other.'

    See You Space Cowboy

    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat
    Hagerstown, Maryland

    --
    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat

  5. #21
    N=R* fs fp ne fl fi fc L Pyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,844
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (0zzy @ Oct. 12 2004,10:28)]When I said local it was meant to be a relative term. There are well documented locations near the NC/GA state line. Asheville is about 50 miles north east from the documented locations. I can't say that these location are the ones that the ranger was telling me about. I didn't ask. I don't know very much about oreo locations but I don't know any locations that are east of Asheville.
    Ozzy,

    I do not know if it is the same location but I do know that a GA oreo site was stripped bare a few years back. I also know who was responsible for the poaching and how they learned of the site. I am not going to name names but I can say that the site location was "leaked" by someone who plays a big part in the community and who probably should have known better. It just adds weight to your comment of always being suspicious, even people who are big names can (and are) bad.
    'My love was science- specifically biology and, more specifically, when placed in a common jar, which of two organisms would devour the other.'

    See You Space Cowboy

    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat
    Hagerstown, Maryland

    --
    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat

  6. #22
    BobZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Arcata, California
    Posts
    1,230
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (Bugweed @ Oct. 13 2004,9:39)]Development took in 1 week, what a truckload of legal collectors could not. (Yes, they had permits). Come to think of it, the developer had legal permits too. So who was right
    I think the reason for the passion against collecting is that it is possible to feel good about attacking a single hobbyist that foolishly admits to collecting a plant from the median strip of a freeway, but it is considered hopeless to stop the highway department from grading that same plant to oblivion or stopping the 100 acres of bog from becoming a shopping mall. The individual collector is clearly committing an "immoral" act (!?), while the developer has completed all of the required hearings, obtained all of the legal permits, and probably contributed to the right politician's election campaigns.

  7. #23

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    188
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This seems to be topic that will forever be prevalent in the cp world. To me it seems to be on the order of religion and politics in that it’s probably best to only talk about it with friends over “beverages”. The whole subject is filled with so many gray areas that it seems to boil down to common sense on the part of the person having to make up their own mind. You can fall into the black & white side and acknowledge that any plant removed from the field in any situation is wrong. Or, you can believe that an argument can be made for responsible collection to the benefit of preservation. I believe arguments for both “camps” have expressed their opinion in this thread.

    The example I keep thinking of is Crestview. Now, to take the black and white side you could say these plants were “poached”. I know the landowner gave permission, but in the black and white side, these are still field “collected” plants. However, these plants are now spread across the country, starting to grow again, and in a couple years everyone who truly cares about having a “Crestview, FL” rubra on their growlist will have one. This in turn falls into a gray area.

    It was also said that we, the members of this board, may be the largest market for these plants. My thought on that is that most of the members of this group are probably much more educated on the issues than someone who unknowingly buys a poached sarracenia at Billy’s Plants ‘n Stuff in Mississippi and takes it home and pops it in their rock garden only to have it die 3 days later. I also think a majority of the growers here are going to have much more access to an Agri-start tissue culture leucophylla tarnok than they are a poached rubra alabamensis. There seems to be only a handful of online sources for these plants, and like Sarracenia mentioned in the opening post, I too have spent way too many hours hunting for every possible source of plants, and I’m just not seeing what appear to be “poached” plants. The sarracenia trade is still fairly small and tight-knit. You can spend a little time on the internet researching any vendor and find a wealth of feedback, opinions, rumors, and such. Also, an email to a dealer or grower you’ve found to be trustworthy can result in all the information you need to make your decision on an unknown vendor.

    So…. This brings us back to the ABG and their protection of a leuco stand. I would like for someone in the area to let the group as a whole know the plans for this plant. I agree that protection should be the number one objective. Maybe someone could talk with them and find out what their program truly is. Some questions I have are: How long have they been the steward of this site? Are they growing specimens in their greenhouses as well as the site? Have they, or do they plan to, share the plant with other botanical gardens? Why don’t they tissue culture the plant? Hundreds of thousands of this particular plant available at the retail level for $3.00 - $5.00 would seem to me to make the actual site that much more secure. Are there really plans to release this plant to the hobbyist? If so, what is their timeframe like? It seems to me the longer they keep this plant to themselves the odds of something along the lines of the Kew Gardens mistake become more possible. If the site is as small as it sounds, even guarded 24 hours a day it sounds like a very precarious situation on many levels. A final thought could be that if they have no program in place to ensure this plant’s survival beyond “their” site, does this not differ much from a “greedy” collector hoarding a plant? Food for thought. (Yes, I do know there is a difference between an established botanical garden and “Steve” in Mobile Alabama with his backyard collection, but wanted to point out that what some consider hoarding could appear to be the case at all levels.)

    In closing I would like to say I presented this post in order to show that no matter what you believe to be “right” there can almost always be an intelligent response that makes you look at individual situations in a different way.

  8. #24
    N=R* fs fp ne fl fi fc L Pyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,844
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (PDX @ Oct. 13 2004,3:06)]So…. This brings us back to the ABG and their protection of a leuco stand. I would like for someone in the area to let the group as a whole know the plans for this plant. I agree that protection should be the number one objective.
    PDX,

    I can answer some of your questions right now.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Maybe someone could talk with them and find out what their program truly is.
    First off, are you an ICPS member? If you are read the article about S. purp montana. The ABG is performing a similar operation with the GA leuco. That should at least enlighten you as to there plan

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]How long have they been the steward of this site?
    I do not know how long they have been stewards to the site but I personally fail to see how this is relevant. The point is that they are working to protect it and keep it viable. Exactly what a steward should do.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Are they growing specimens in their greenhouses as well as the site?
    Yes, they are growing specimens at ABG. I said that in my earlier post.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Have they, or do they plan to, share the plant with other botanical gardens?
    Yes, they have shared this plant with other institutions.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Why don’t they tissue culture the plant? Hundreds of thousands of this particular plant available at the retail level for $3.00 - $5.00 would seem to me to make the actual site that much more secure.
    Because as a conservation organization they are not interested in making a quick buck. Their goal is to stabilize and maintain the wild stand. The details of how they do this are in the S. montana article. TC does not enter into the equation because you can not introduce TC'd plants back into the wild.

    I would also add that to look at the GA leuco you would probably not be able to tell it from any other typical leuco so putting it into TC would likely flop because no one would want to put "just another leuco" into TC when there are already so many out there?

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Are there really plans to release this plant to the hobbyist?
    I can not say, I have never asked. It seems to me that that should be ABGs decision and not something pushed on them by the community at large.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]If so, what is their timeframe like?
    Again, that is for them to decide.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]It seems to me the longer they keep this plant to themselves the odds of something along the lines of the Kew Gardens mistake become more possible.
    Point of clarification it is not a single plant that we are talking about it is a population. A single person is not going to cause the out and out death of all the plants through a screw up like at Kew. And even if some new employee of ABG did water all the CPs with tapwater it would not matter because that is what they use anyways. Here in Atlanta we are lucky like that.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]If the site is as small as it sounds, even guarded 24 hours a day it sounds like a very precarious situation on many levels.
    I can not tell you how large or small the site is or how well protected it is. But I can tell you that the only people who know about it are ABG and what ever branch of the government controls that plot of land. And it is pretty much a fact that the fewer people that know about the site the easier it is to keep it safe.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]A final thought could be that if they have no program in place to ensure this plant’s survival beyond “their” site, does this not differ much from a “greedy” collector hoarding a plant?
    It is not "greedy" it is called conservation. The goal of their program is to ensure the stability and genetics of the stand. It is about the wild Georgia leuco wild.

    You talk about not dividing it all into black and white but that is just what you have done here. ABG is black and the hobbyists are white. Look at it this way: What is the best way to ensure that the endangered black rhino does not go extinct? Do you limit access and breeding of the black rhino to people who know what they are doing or do you hand out black rhinos to everyone that says they want one? I would think the answer was pretty obvious.

    What seems to be getting looked over is that conservation is different than preservation. Everyone is saying that the best way to conserve the population is to get as many plants in cultivation as possible. That is absolutly false!! That is preservation. Sure putting a plant into cultivation means that even if the wild stand die that the plant is not totally lost. but 10,000 copies of the same plant is worthless. Inbreeding works the same way with plants and a limited genetic pool just leads to sickly weak offspring. You can not re-introduce domestic strains back into the wild they are not fit to survive. Look at it this way, consider a wild caught mouse and a lab raised mouse. You take them and toss them out into a field. The lab raised mouse is going to die. No ifs. No ands. No buts. It is the same with plants, none of the plants in your collection would survive when placed in the hyper-competative environment of the real world. Conservation is about keeping things stable. It is about preventing loss or injury. It is the careful management of the environment and nature. That is what ABG is doing, careful managment. I cannot believe that their ethics are being questioned.
    'My love was science- specifically biology and, more specifically, when placed in a common jar, which of two organisms would devour the other.'

    See You Space Cowboy

    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat
    Hagerstown, Maryland

    --
    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •